If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Scrapfe: I haven't heard of spraying on the scale you describe up here but your point is one I have been trying to make for some time...

Cotton is the #1 value added crop in American agriculture.

jim, unlike corn, wheat or soybeans, cotton has no insect enemies. It seems that every insect LOVES cotton, eating cotton that is.
A partial list is: boll weevils, pink boll worms, boll worms (the same species as the corn ear worm)http://ipm.ncsu.edu/AG271/corn_sorgh...n_earworm.htmlhttp://wiki.bugwood.org/Archive:SEIPM/Cotton_Insects
tobacco bud worm, thrips, two spotted spider mites, cabbage leaf lopper, banded wing white flies, tarnished plant bugs, cut worms and a platoon of army worms. Some times an insecticide that controls one pest causes a population explosion in another because beneficial insects are killed.

Also remember that cotton is a perennial and if cotton is grown in areas without a killing frost and provided with enough water, cotton will grow into a large shrub or a small tree. To the insect world this makes a stalk of cotton the 401k or trust fund plant of American agricultural.

Here is a chart that shows a 1,000% or higher insecticide use on Alabama cotton verses cotton grown in some other places.http://www.bt.ucsd.edu/bt_cotton.html
Here is an example of how Bt cotton and the boll weevil eradication program (using pesticides in a smart way) has benefited bees. Bt corn has done the same thing.http://www.cotton.org/tech/pest/boll...adication4.cfm
the above link should be read by everyone regardless of your views on pesticides.

Scrapfe---Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.--Otto von Bismarck.

Is this the same Bud Dingler who told us all a year back that "bees feed DO NOT FEED on corn pollen"? Pity that nobody told the bees that collect neonic contaminated pollen from the 88 million acres of poisoned corn mentioned in the Purdue Study.

Last I heard from Randy Oliver he was in meetings with Bayer - and telling us how they were going to fund him to carry out long term field studies on Imidacloprid. His actual words- as best I can recall were that he and Bayer and the EPA were all "singing from the same hymn sheet" on their concern over Imidacloprid.

Do you and Mr Oliver SERIOUSLY expect us to believe that the EPA has not received one SINGLE OFFICIAL COMPLAINT about neonicotinoid seed coatings and bee deaths?

The EPA has received HUNDREDS of "OFFICIAL" complaints about the impact of neonicotinoid seed coatings and their causing mass-bee - deaths.
Here are a couple that are 'official' - from the National Honey Board:

And here is the EPA's tongue-twisting, snake-oil seller's response - which is worthy of an Eastern European Police State bureaucrat in its complete determination to 'say nothing'. if you can understand even a single paragraph - then you are ahead of me.

The EPA also received hundreds of complaints from beekeepers like Dave Hackenberg and Tom Theobald - and from organisations like PANNA and Beyond Pesticides - these are matters of Public Record.

Perhaps you and Mr Oliver could enlighten us as to the basis for your quoting of his 'alleged' statement that "the EPA has not received a single official complaint" about the use of neonic seed coatings on corn and the associated death of 4 million bee colonies across the USA?

Better still - maybe you could stop spreading smokescreens and laying false trails about this issues and actually DEAL WITH THE SCIENCE AND THE FACTS IN THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY STUDY.

I probably signed 2 of those petitions, and a 3rd with Avaaz.org. Never got a personal response, didn't know what happened.

Gypsi

BUT - I rate the actual experience of members of Beesource keeping bees between treated corn fields and treated soybean fields far more highly than any industry or university study, since the big players are often paid to lie, and paid quite well. Where as a guy with 2 hives has nothing to gain or lose by honestly saying what happened to his bees, and I don't remember his name, but his bees were fine.

Stuck in Texas. Learning Permaculture in drought, guess I will teach permaculture in drought. The bees are still alive.

An issue that might complicate matters, is that individual hives, even those of similar strength and positioned side-by-side in the same apiary, won't necessarily forage from the same sources, or even work various sources to the same degree. I can think of many factors that affect the foraging behaviors of hives. One hive in an apiary may harvest a high percentage of tainted pollen from an unlikely source, while all the other colonies in that same apiary, may never collect a basket load.

I rate the actual experience of members of Beesource keeping bees between treated corn fields and treated soybean fields far more highly than any industry or university study, since the big players are often paid to lie, and paid quite well. Where as a guy with 2 hives has nothing to gain or lose by honestly saying what happened to his bees, and I don't remember his name, but his bees were fine.

You would take the word of one person with two hives who is not a professional beekeeper or researcher, over the word of several university students and professors with degrees. What are the chances Perdue University, one of the top 100 universities in the word, being able and willing to fake a study, and convince all the students and staff involved to lie about it. These studies I am sure involved more then two hives and a couple rows of corn.

It looks like my corn seed. I'll take a picture tomorrow, but yes, basically hot pink. I'm beat - daughter had a truck emergency, just got in from a rescue mission. Guess that means my seed was treated with mercury? My tired brain doesn't even want to know what that means.

Gypsi

Stuck in Texas. Learning Permaculture in drought, guess I will teach permaculture in drought. The bees are still alive.

... I rate the actual experience of members of Beesource keeping bees between treated corn fields and treated soybean fields far more highly than any industry or university study, since the big players are often paid to lie, and paid quite well...

Ms Gypsi, I feel that it is Deja Vu that you made the above statement on the eve of the 51st anniversary of President Dwight David Eisenhower's Military Industrial Complex speech (01/17/1961). President Eisenhower was a very smart cookie, and what most people fail to recognize and don't know is that Ike condemned two equal dangers in his "Military Industrial Complex" speech. The second danger that Ike spoke of is the power of money and it's caustic effect on scholarship and research at American universities by creating a scientific elite who drives public policy to reap a harvest of research dollars. So I guess you could also call Ike's "Military Industrial Complex" speech his "University Research Elite Complex" speech as well. http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle5407.htm

Don't allow anyone, me included to bully you.

Last edited by Scrapfe; 01-17-2012 at 11:15 PM.

Scrapfe---Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.--Otto von Bismarck.

BUT - I rate the actual experience of members of Beesource keeping bees between treated corn fields and treated soybean fields far more highly than any industry or university study, since the big players are often paid to lie, and paid quite well. Where as a guy with 2 hives has nothing to gain or lose by honestly saying what happened to his bees, and I don't remember his name, but his bees were fine.

if you would like some interesting reading from a researcher(jerry bromenshank sp?) on why the actual research is so bad read the following post on bee-l .
its too long to copy and cut and paste doesn't work due to imbeded characters.

Last I heard from Randy Oliver he was in meetings with Bayer - and telling us how they were going to fund him to carry out long term field studies on Imidacloprid. His actual words- as best I can recall were that he and Bayer and the EPA were all "singing from the same hymn sheet" on their concern over Imidacloprid.

Do you and Mr Oliver SERIOUSLY expect us to believe that the EPA has not received one SINGLE OFFICIAL COMPLAINT about neonicotinoid seed coatings and bee deaths?

would be interested in where you found the info on Randy Oliver doing a long term neonic study? I check on bee-l and his web site with no mention. he has been trying for at least two years in his posts on bee-l to get the committe in Calif. to do a study but it doesn't hit the top five list of problems(by beeks in calif) according to posts. Is this the post from bee-l you are refering to?

>
> >Although the study has touched on my concerns quite a bit of research is
> still needed.

At the AHPA conference today, Bayer and EPA representatives reported.
The issue of contaminated dust from pneumatic planters was downplayed. I
brought it up during questioning, and found that they are not receiving
incident reports about it in the U.S., which surprised me. I asked to whom
reports by beekeepers experiencing seed dust problems such as in the paper
cited should be made.

there is an article in ABJ called chemical/miticide warfare. Since I get it online I can't copy info from it but they lost most of the hives in a communal apiary for muliple years in a row.
for the beeks that would prefere the info from other beeks than from reaserchers, they sent away the comb to a lab(not usda as far as I could) the results were the normal
varroa mitacides as residuals and also hope my keyboard types what my eyes are seeing on the paper.
chlorothalonil (a miticide) at 202ppb
chlorpyrifos (a organophospate at 2.3 ppb)
from the article they didn't say they had ever seen any pesticide kills, they do not appear to be located in a rural location as they were talking to the greenhouse owner although they do mention that the chemicals are used on corn etc. also looking them up online the organophosphate has not been available for sale to homeowners since 2000.
they sent the comb away specificly looking for neonics, and I didn't see any names that I recognized at a neonic but I'm no expert, but they never mentioned them again.
one thing I have found intersting, not related to the article, in all the residual data on nenonic. the fact sheet they say that for instance on corn that xx parts per million are ok for consumption but on all other pesticedes I looked at they all list residue at max of xx parts per billion? the other thing I find amazing is they don't actually do any testing, they take the manufactures data and run it through models to estimate the results???? when do you think they updated the models for systemics.

mike syracuse ny
I went to bed mean, and woke up meaner. Marshal Dillon

And here is the EPA's tongue-twisting, snake-oil seller's response - which is worthy of an Eastern European Police State bureaucrat in its complete determination to 'say nothing'. if you can understand even a single paragraph - then you are ahead of me.

The second paragraph on the second page is pretty clear to me - The EPA approved clothianidid because it is a better alternative to organophosphates. If it wasnt clear the first time, this point is re-stated in fourth sentence of the second paragraph of page 3. Allow me to paraphrase the paragraph in case anyone is confused, "Clothianidid generally poses less risk to agricultural workers, and fish, and wildlife when compared to the organophosphate insecticide alternatives".

Despite what people think, the EPA does not exist to ban all pesticide use. Nothing is perfect when it comes to insecticides, but if one is selected over the other because it is safer for the environment, it was the right choice. The EPA has to consider ALL risks and they did their job, period. You cant keep everyone happy. Trout Unlimited was probably on the the EPA's ass because organophosphates are killing fish. Not to mention the ag workers becoming ill from exposure to organophosphates.

Also concerning the "imminent hazard" that was falsely claimed in the initial letter from the National Honeybee Advisory Board, et. all., the EPA called their bluff. No imminant hazard exists. The fourth sentence on page 2 makes this abundantly clear.

It's set to public so you should be able to see it. between hot pink and cardinal red I guess.
I am interested in knowing whether it is treated, but not desperate enough to send it to a lab. Thanks for any info.

Gypsi

Stuck in Texas. Learning Permaculture in drought, guess I will teach permaculture in drought. The bees are still alive.

Gypsi, I always thought the reason to dye seeds was as an indication that they were treated in some manner and to prevent the seed from being used as food or feed. Only case where I have come across untreated seed that was dyed or colored was in packets of mixed varieties so that you could distinguish between the seed of multiple varieties that were packaged together.

The seed was treated with a fungicide and the pink dye is there to let you know. Almost all sweet corn seed that I have seen is treated that way. You had better check with your seed supplier because if they say it is un-treated, they either dont know or are not telling the truth.

Corn Corn seed is especially susceptible to attack by soil-borne pathogens when sown in cold (below 50 degrees Fahrenheit) wet soil, when the seed is in poor condition, when it is mechanically injured, or if it has been stored for two years or more. Seed treatment will protect against seed rot and reduce the danger of seedling blight. Sweet corn is more susceptible to attack than field corn, but both should be treated. Most field corn is already treated when purchased. A number of protectant and systemic fungicides are registered for control of seedling blights and seed rot in corn.

Mercury has not been used as a fungicide for quite some time, but I'd wash my hands well after planting treated sweet corn seed (and use gloves while planting it if you touch the seed).

Chlorothalonil is a fungicide, very commonly used, and probaly not a real threat to bees. The trade mane is Daconil.

Chlorpyrophos is a miticide (probably next to each other in the list).

Neo-nics will NOT show up in comb analysis, as they are not fat (wax) soluble. They will be present in pollen if found in the hive, but probably not in honey, as noted below.

The lack of neo-nic residues in bee hives had two causes -- first, it's extremely toxic, and bees will be exposed to lethal levels when they pick it up from guttation droplets or contaminated flowers, and hence die before they return to the hive. This is why the toxic levels are so low in plants and why neo-nics are such effective insecticides.

The other reason is that the bees metabloize neo-nics very quickly, so if they are not killed outright, the level of neo-nic in the bee drops off very quickly from conversion into break-down metabolites and excretion. Probably never makes it into the honey, as the extended processing nectar undergoes to make it into honey will permit enough time for the neo-nics to be removed by the bees and excreted.

The real danger, other than the acute die-off of foragers from direct contact, is brood being fed contaminated pollen, or nurse bees dying or being severely injured by eating contaminated pollen.

Bee kills are not the only problem with neo-nics. The most concerning problem is long term persistence in soil and therefore accumulation, with much higher amounts found in plants with each year of use.